I have the following rule in my DRL file rule "inverteroff-evaluate-based-on-pvpower" # the if part when alertDefinition : Alert ($configID:alertConfigID) alertCondition: AlertCondition(name == "InverterOff") context: EvaluationContext ( timeRight == true, pvPower!= null, pvPower <= 0 ) then # what do we do if the rule evaluates to true log("Triggered inverteroff alert for alertConfigID" + $configID); alertDefinition.setState(AlertState.TRIGGERED); log("Context info:" + context); end I would like to know if I assert an EvaluationContext for which timeRight == false, will the getPvPower() method still be called ? (logically it shouldn't be called since the "," separated conditions are "AND" conditions) called irrespective of the value of timeRight. If that is the expected behaviour how can I improve my rule definition to ensure that getPvPower isn't called if it is not necessary. Thank you, Rahul Phadnis

The answer to your question is not simple. Basically, the constraint evaluation will follow a priority order, in the following way: 1) all alpha constraints are evaluated 2) all beta indexable constraints are evaluated 3) all beta non indexable constraints are evaluated Inside each of the categories above, the constraints are evaluated in the order they are written in the patterns. At any time a constraint fails, they will short circuit and not evaluate later constraints. The above ordering is made so that the engine executes them in "optimal" order for performance. Obviously, this may not be the "best" order, but it is the best the engine can infer. So, I guess what is happening in your use case is that the constraint you want to evaluate later is falling in a previous category, so that is the reason it is being evaluated out of your desired order. Having said that, "timeRight == true" is an alpha constraint, so it "should" be executing first. Can you please get a self contained test that shows this case? I will take a look in it and check if we have a bug or not. There are workarounds, but I would like to investigate this one. Regards, Edson 2007/4/5, Rahul Phadnis <rahul.phadnis(a)fatspaniel.com&gt;: -- Edson Tirelli Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer Office: +55 11 3124-6000 Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151 JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com

Can we call methods with arguments in the LHS? Or this can be done for globals but not facts? Is this a new feature of 3.1? -Rahul

Rahul, Yes, this is new to 3.1M2 (trunk). You can call methods with parameters if you use predicates. But it is important to note you must be careful when doing it, because the return value must be time-constant, and there are perf impacts if you abuse it. []s Edson 2007/4/6, Rahul Phadnis <rahul.phadnis(a)fatspaniel.com&gt;: -- Edson Tirelli Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer Office: +55 11 3124-6000 Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151 JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com

Has anyone in the users list tested any DAO calls from condition side .... without using from keyword .. something like this .. i know i am supposed to test this in trunk but is there anyone who has actually done it either in trunk or M1 ________________________________ From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 1:50 PM To: Rules Users List Subject: Re: [rules-users] LHS Dao Calls Sanjay, Are you trying with trunk? there was an issue using globals inside predicates that was fixed after M1... Let me know... []s Edson 2007/4/6, Sanjay Singh - s0singh < Sanjay.Singh(a)wal-mart.com&gt;: Thanks Edson .. i tried with these syntaxes but does not work .. any other clues ? just to let you know that itemValidationDao is declared global and itemvo is asserted when item : ItemVo(itemStatusCode != ItemVo.STATUS_ACTIVE , (itemValidationDao.isValidItemStatus(itemStatusCode))) Caused by: org.drools.rule.InvalidRulePackage: unknown:15:70 Unexpected token '(' unknown:16:1 mismatched token: [@160,673:676='then',<33>,16:1]; expecting type ')' unknown:17:29 Unexpected token '"itemStatusCode"' unknown:18:22 Unexpected token '"Item is cross ref prime"' when item : ItemVo(statusCode : itemStatusCode != ItemVo.STATUS_ACTIVE , itemValidationDao.isValidItemStatus(statusCode)) Caused by: org.drools.rule.InvalidRulePackage: unknown:15:70 Unexpected token 'itemValidationDao' unknown:16:1 mismatched token: [@158,671:674='then',<33>,16:1]; expecting type ')' unknown:17:29 Unexpected token '"itemStatusCode"' unknown:18:22 Unexpected token '"Item is cross ref prime"' This also does not seem to work -- i have 3.1.0 M1 version .. item : ItemVo ( itemStatusCode == ItemVo.STATUS_ACTIVE | == ItemVo.STATUS_DELETE ) while this still works : item : ItemVo(itemStatusCode == ItemVo.STATUS_INACTIVE) or ItemVo(itemStatusCode == ItemVo.STATUS_DELETE) ________________________________ From: rules-users-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 10:22 AM To: Rules Users List Subject: Re: [rules-users] LHS Dao Calls Sunjay, Methods called by using the "from" CE are expected to return a collection of VO's, not boolean results. For your case, probably what you want is something like: ItemVo( statusCode : itemStatusCode != null, (itemValidationDao.isValidItemStatus (statusCode)) ) A predicate allow you to call a method returning a boolean value and use it as a constraint. []s Edson 2007/4/5, Sanjay Singh - s0singh <Sanjay.Singh(a)wal-mart.com&gt;: Here is a quick test i was trying to do for calling the dao in LHS but it fails ... what am i missing .. global com.itemfile.item.dao.ItemValidationDao itemValidationDao; global com.itemfile.rules.ValidationErrorMap errors; rule "Item should have a valid status" when ItemVo( statusCode : itemStatusCode != null) ItemVo( statusCode == true ) from itemValidationDao.isValidItemStatus(statusCode) then errors.addValidationError("nullItemStatusCode","Item Status Code is null"); System.out.println("Item Base Defaults Called" + itemValidationDao.isValidItemStatus(statusCode)); System.out.println("Item Status Code is null"); end Caused by: org.drools.rule.InvalidRulePackage: unknown:32:28 Unexpected token 'itemValidationDao' isValidItemStatus () method returns a boolean and i need to check if thats true than go to the RHS side .... somehow it does not recognize itemValidationDao in LHS side .. RHS same call works .... Can anybody suggest how to call database in LHS ... thanks ________________________________ ******************************************************************* *** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error destroy it immediately. ****************************************************** **************** Wal-Mart Confidential **************************** ****************************************** _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users -- Edson Tirelli Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer Office: +55 11 3124-6000 Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151 JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com ________________________________ ******************************************************************* *** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error destroy it immediately. ****************************************************** **************** Wal-Mart Confidential **************************** ****************************************** _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users -- Edson Tirelli Software Engineer - JBoss Rules Core Developer Office: +55 11 3124-6000 Mobile: +55 11 9218-4151 JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com ----------------------------------------- ******************************************************************* *** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error destroy it immediately. ****************************************************** **************** Wal-Mart Confidential **************************** ******************************************